Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!killer!vector!telecom-gateway From: goldstein%delni.DEC@decwrl.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein dtn226-7388) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Calling Line Identification Restriction (CLIR) Message-ID: Date: 16 Mar 89 09:35:00 GMT Sender: news@vector.UUCP Lines: 59 Approved: telecom-request@vector.uucp X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.uucp X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 93, message 1 of 6 All of this brouhaha (sp?) about Calling Line ID is guaranteed to add heat, but I don't see a lot of light. So in the interests of keeping the flamage more to point, I'll volunteer a little more information. I am a member of ANSI Technical Subcommittee T1S1, which is the US standards body for ISDN and other new telephone network services. One of these services (in the ISDN context) is Calling Line ID (CLID). Today it's a kludge, but in the ISDN protocols (which are almost the same for circuit-mode telephony and packet-mode data), the incoming call message includes the calling number. Of course, you have to subscribe to the CLID feature or that particular information element won't be sent. (BTW, the CCITT but not ANSI is working on Connected Line ID, which tells you where you call was actually answered, if forwarded.) One of the nice things about CLID is that it is accompanied by CLID Restriction (CLIR). To quote a very recent service description, Calling Line Identification Restriction (CLIR) is a supplementary service offered to the calling party to restrict presentation of the Calling Line Identification, possibly with additional address information to the called party. There are several modes of CLIR. You can subscribe to it in permanent mode, so it's active for all calls. You number is thus never displayed. (This might be overriden for 911, but it's not mentioned in the document.) You can subscribe to it in temporary mode, so that the called number is displayed or not displayed on a per-call basis (either default is available). There's also provision for a User-Provided Number as well as the Network-Provided Number. The proposed CLIR is designed to answer most of the "privacy" issues. Whether it costs extra is up to your (state) regulatory body. Whether it's implemented is up to the CO vendors (AT&T and NT, in the US) and the telcos (who will tell them what to implement). I expect that within a couple of years, CLIR will be deployed along with CLID. Provided that this actually occurs, the "privacy" issues should be quelled. It is the interim arrangements that are potentially more abusive. Since people don't have the CLIR option today, there is potential for abuse. Defaulting unlisted numbers to restricted would probably help a bit, but in any case this transition period won't be free of conflict. BTW, there are reasons why you definitely might want a business to know your number. If, for instance, your electric service goes west, then if you call the electric company's ACD and there's a long queue of waiting people (since your neighbors are calling too!), their computer can do a lookup on the numbers and see that there's a flurry of calls from a certain area. Heck, if I had "CLIR Temporary - Default Restricted", then in that case, I'd hit the override code! I'd also note that 911 service for years has included calling party ID. The police have long had it; now it's becoming available to the rest of us. And the "women's shelter" issue might also be mooted by CLIR, but in any case, having their number wouldn't reveal the address. Some folks are looking for controversy where there needn't be any. fred